Cross post 196

    • DragonTypeWyvern
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      If you look at their current sourcing it’s fine. They’re not cutting apart glaciers, they’re gathering it from parts that have calved and will just melt apart regardless.

      Greenland has a right to sell their natural resources as much as anyone else, and the sad thing is this admittedly ludicrous enterprise is more profitable for less environmental damage than most things.

      • Hubi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        95
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        The problem is all the carbon that is emitted to transport the ice from Greenland halfway around the world for no other reason than bullshit marketing.

        • FlapKap@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          Since Greenland Imports a lot and doesn’t really have a lot of export, a big part of the trip would be sailed anyway, just with empty containers

          • Flughoernchen@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            31
            ·
            10 months ago

            People forget it’s not just the shipping itself. First of all, ships just like every other vehicle need more energy to move the heavier they are. Secondly the ice needs to be cooled for most of the trip and portable coolers are real energy guzzlers. So without doing the maths transporting ice from Greenland to Dubai is much more harmful than ships with empty containers on the same way.

            • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              The first point doesn’t hold though. it is always better to have a ship run with cargo than without, in terms of efficiency. Afterall the point of the ship moving is to transport cargo.

              For the cooling i am also sceptical. It was common all over Europe to trade with ice cut out of glaciers and frozen lakes until the invention of the cooling pump made electrical fridges a thing. If you store the ice in somewhat well insulated containers, it will cool itself quite decently for long travels. Icecellars were common to hold Ice that was collected in winter and lasted for cooling all throughout the year even in the mediteranian areas.

              I also find this business obscene, but i do not see, that it would be more harmful, than sending empty ships around the world.

              • elDalvini@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                It is more efficient to have a ship moving with cargo than without, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t additional emissions. The ratio of profit to effort is just higher because there is some profit as opposed to none. You wouldn’t load a ship up with useless mass you can’t sell just so you’re shipping something.

                Your argument is like always running the heater in your car because that way the engine heat is at least used for something. Yes, technically the efficiency goes up because more of the energy in the fuel is harnessed. But that doesn’t mean the fuel usage or emissions are any lower, and in the summer the heater doesn’t do you any good either.

        • variants@possumpat.io
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          I thought it was only possible because they are using ships that would otherwise be empty on their return trips otherwise they couldn’t afford it

        • DragonTypeWyvern
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          International overseas shipping is actually pretty carbon efficient as transport goes.

          Hell they’re actually pretty down for efficiency improvements in shipping, to the point where people are just straight up talking about bringing back sails because… Well, why not? It’s free energy.

          It’s not necessary but you compare this to crypto or deliberately inefficient vehicle design and it’s just not something to get upset about.

  • nis@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    10 months ago

    …ice which has never been polluted by any human being.

    shows picture of human being polluting said ice

      • Pika@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        omg I never noticed that, yea he defo has a face that looks like it would be a punching face in cliche cartoon scenes. I don’t mean it as an insult just an observation lol

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Guess I’ll post this again:


    I put this in the cross post, bit figure it belongs here, too:

    While ridiculous, there’s interesting context here.

    • Greenland has little to no economy
    • The ice is mined from ice that has already broken away from the glacier, thus not reducing any more than nature has already
    • Cargo ships bringing frozen food used to leave empty, now that same fuel is used to transport ice back instead of going to waste
    • The founder has always dreamed of a sustainable economy for Greenland
    • He is conflicted about how his work to do this in a sustainable way is being taken

    Lots of gray here.


    The whole conversation, including how the ships are already there, details on economy, etc, are in this thread: https://lemmy.world/comment/6556590

    • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Greenland has little to no economy because it has a population less than 60 000. And they still have to fly the ice to the middle east from Greenland which is hardly climate friendly.

      • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Cause vs correlation, and untrue. There is no economy because there is only fish. The population dwindles because of immigration. As for flying the ice, that does not happen. Read the link.

        • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Greenland’s per capita GDP is 13th in the world. They’re doing fine. Greenland has also always had a small population. It’s hardly fair to call it dwindling, when it’s about double today what it was in the 60s. Also a large part of the emigration is because the choices for higher education are very limited. Not because of a lack of industry or employment. As there is more than enough mining, fishing and tourism to sustain a population of 57000.

          As for shipping the ice, I’m sure you aren’t going to try to tell me that keeping ice refrigerated from nuuk to Dubai as well as the extra fuel used to transport (ships displace more water when they have cargo) have less of a carbon footprint than simply freezing water in Dubai.

          Some Greenlandic music for you

  • Jaderick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This is going to be how the zombie virus comes about. Someone ingests a million year old virus that becomes infectious and boom, we got new COVID.

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    10 months ago

    Mmmm it’s like playing the lottery but if you win you get to be patient zero for the ancient virus that ends up wiping out humanity.

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s environmentally friendly because they don’t waste energy to freeze the water. It’s already frozen! /s

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    10 months ago

    So while the rest of us are worrying about shrinking glaciers, Dubai is actively ice mining glaciers and shipping them to the middle of the desert so rich people can have fancy cocktails. Out-fucking-standing.

    • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      No, this is exported by Greenland.

      They’re using only chunks that have already separated, transporting it on outgoing cargo ships that are already empty and it becomes one of the few export products for Greenland.

      Weird idea, but there are a few redeeming points if you look at the full story.

      • sqibkw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m cool with it in that state. But my concern here is that while it starts out innocent, if demand increases, it’s only a matter of time until they start mining it and chartering more ships to transport it. Especially in an economy like Greenland’s.

        This same pattern has been followed a thousand times in the past. Lots of instances of abusing our natural resources start out innocently.

    • SeabassDan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s okay, I can only imagine the 10,000 year old bacteria those guys are gonna be drinking with that ice when it thaws, it all balances out.

  • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 months ago

    Had to ask myself what kind of bars they even had on Dubai. Apparently they don’t take the alcohol thing as seriously as I thought.

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    “Yeah, I’m still drinking what used to be piss, but at least it wasn’t human piss. Because ewwies. Right, barkeep?”

    Barkeep: (two thumbs up) (how the fuck should I know)